Früher, entschiedener und substanzieller?: Engagiertes außenpolitisches Handeln und militärische Zurückhaltung sind kein Widerspruch
In: HSFK-Standpunkte 2014,1
In: HSFK-Standpunkte 2014,1
In: International negotiation: a journal of theory and practice, Band 19, Heft 3, S. 518
ISSN: 1382-340X
Resistance to negotiation and the continuation of violence dictate the course of events in the Afghanistan conflict. However, several studies have thoroughly explored the interests of the main parties to the conflict and a settlement that respects their key demands is possible. The current military situation resembles a 'hurting stalemate,' which according to rationalist assumptions should compel the parties to move toward negotiations. This article argues that the main obstacle to negotiation is an underlying and unaddressed conflict of recognition between the United States, the Afghan government, and the Taliban. While each party believes it is driven by justice claims, they perceive their opponents to be driven by a hostile strategy informed by incompatible interests. Relying on the Cultural Theory of International Relations, this article explores the parties' motives in the conflict, focusing on the need to strive for esteem and honor. It suggests that the reciprocal acknowledgement of legitimate identity-related justice claims could remove a key obstacle to formal negotiation. Adapted from the source document.
In: International negotiation: a journal of theory and practice, Band 19, Heft 3, S. 518-542
ISSN: 1571-8069
Resistance to negotiation and the continuation of violence dictate the course of events in the Afghanistan conflict. However, several studies have thoroughly explored the interests of the main parties to the conflict and a settlement that respects their key demands is possible. The current military situation resembles a "hurting stalemate," which according to rationalist assumptions should compel the parties to move toward negotiations. This article argues that the main obstacle to negotiation is an underlying and unaddressed conflict of recognition between the United States, the Afghan government, and the Taliban. While each party believes it is driven by justice claims, they perceive their opponents to be driven by a hostile strategy informed by incompatible interests. Relying on the Cultural Theory of International Relations, this article explores the parties' motives in the conflict, focusing on the need to strive for esteem and honor. It suggests that the reciprocal acknowledgement of legitimate identity-related justice claims could remove a key obstacle to formal negotiation.
In: HSFK-Standpunkte: Beiträge zum demokratischen Frieden, Heft 6, S. 1
ISSN: 0945-9332
In: PRIF Working Papers, Band 20
This paper maps out the negotiation environment of the Afghanistan conflict. So far, all attempts to end the violence between the Afghan government, insurgency, and US and NATO through negotiations have failed. Key obstacles to negotiations are the complexity of the conflict and the variety of state and non-state actors that are directly or indirectly involved. This paper explores the interests and relationships of these actors and highlights the most important alliances and connections. Finally, these connections are visualized in a network diagram.
In: HSFK-Standpunkte: Beiträge zum demokratischen Frieden, Heft 1, S. 1-8
ISSN: 0945-9332